Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18 ISSN:1916-8128 EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVES AND THE CHANGING NATURE OF HOME EDUCATION: FINDING BALANCE BETWEEN AUTONOMY, SUPPORT, AND ACCOUNTABILITY By: Kenneth V. ANTHONY Abstract Four families' experiences in an educational cooperative and the impact on their home schools are detailed in the study. Results indicated that the families were highly dependent upon the cooperative. The cooperative signified a compromise for the families between the freedom of home schooling and the accountability and support provided by a school. These findings are important for traditional education. Just as home schools are evolving and developing institutions that look something like schools, schools can change too. One way is for the traditional school to operate as a family and community resource rather than the sole purveyor of knowledge. Keywords: homeschooling; nontraditional education; parent involvement; parents as teachers; partnerships in education Introduction Education performs multiple roles in societies including socialization, teaching academic skills, and the preservation of “the cultural heritage of the nation.” (Perry & Perry, 1991, p. 312).
28
Embed
EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVES AND THE CHANGING NATURE OF …€¦ · Introduction Education performs multiple roles in societies including socialization, teaching academic skills, and
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
ISSN:1916-8128
EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVES AND THE
CHANGING NATURE OF HOME EDUCATION:
FINDING BALANCE BETWEEN AUTONOMY,
SUPPORT, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
By: Kenneth V. ANTHONY
Abstract
Four families' experiences in an educational cooperative and the impact on their home schools
are detailed in the study. Results indicated that the families were highly dependent upon the
cooperative. The cooperative signified a compromise for the families between the freedom of
home schooling and the accountability and support provided by a school. These findings are
important for traditional education. Just as home schools are evolving and developing institutions
that look something like schools, schools can change too. One way is for the traditional school to
operate as a family and community resource rather than the sole purveyor of knowledge.
Keywords: homeschooling; nontraditional education; parent involvement; parents as teachers;
partnerships in education
Introduction
Education performs multiple roles in societies including socialization, teaching academic
skills, and the preservation of “the cultural heritage of the nation.” (Perry & Perry, 1991, p. 312).
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
37
Dewey (1944) concluded that the development of writing and complex societies resulted in the
need for schools. He posited that education was necessary for the continuation of society and in
America the role of education was entrusted to the schools. Public education in America was
specifically envisioned as providing a “common experience and a common heritage for the
diverse children of the nation” (Greene, 2007, p. 1). When most people think about education
they think of traditional schools, but in the past few decades some have resisted the norm in
education and have chosen to home school.
Their reasons vary, but two studies highlight the major reasons families state they home
school. Princiotta and Bielick (2006) reported that the number one reason for home schooling
was the environment of other schools (31%), followed by to provide religious and moral
instruction (30%) and dissatisfaction with academic instruction of other schools (16%). Collum
(2005) identified four major reasons that reinforce Priciotta and Bielick: dissatisfaction with
public schools, academic and pedagogical concerns, religious values, and family needs.
The number of students home schooled rivals the number of students who attend charter
schools, the movement that is often cited as the one making significant changes to the way
children are taught in America (Bruce, 2009). Brian D. Ray, President of the National Home
Education Research Institute estimated that the number of home school students in the United
States in 2010 was between 1.7 million and 2.3 million (Ray, 2011). This number is in line with
another estimate made by the National Center for Educational Statistics that there were 1.5
million home school students in 2007 (Bielick, 2008). The Brookings Institute reported that there
were 4,900 charter schools operating in 39 states in the United States serving 1.6 million students
(Dynarski, Hoxby, Loveless, Schneider, Whitehurst, & Witte, 2010). Both movements continue
to grow and offer parents and communities alternatives to traditional public schools.
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
38
As home schooling has grown various innovations have emerged in home school family
practices. One central to this study is the home school cooperative. As Hill (2000) predicted,
many home school families have formed organizations that look something like schools. As
committed as many home school parents are to the freedom of the home school environment,
why do they choose to relinquish some autonomy to the cooperative?
These home school groups and cooperatives play a variety of roles. Safran (2009)
identified 3 types of home school groups. The first is the Co-op. It “gives shape and purpose to
the home education practice,” sets goals and timelines for students, and “requires a big
commitment” (p. 26). The second is the timetabled group. It is less formal than the co-op and
helps parents learn from each other’s practice and share resources. Finally, there is the support
group. It is the least formal of the groups with no formal meeting place or organization. Its
purpose is to support others who are home schooling as needed. According to Safran, all of the
groups help parents learn to home school. Safran (2010) further commented that home schoolers
as a group are a community of practice “with a joint enterprise of home educating children” (p.
111). What other roles can home school groups perform? What does participation in a home
school cooperative look like? This study provides an in-depth description of the role the home
school co-op played in the operation of four families’ home schools. The goal of the study was to
provide an in-depth study of one type of home school group; the cooperative or co-op. The study
is important because it extends the idea of home school group as a support to a provider of
curriculum. It also attempts to identify home school practices that could inform education in
traditional school settings.
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
39
Methodology
Research Design
The study sought to fill a gap in the literature on home schooling by exploring the role of
a cooperative in home school operations. It was part of a larger study of home school family
motivations (Anthony & Burroughs, 2010), home school operations (Anthony & Burroughs,
2012), curriculum choices, and challenges. The study was a collective case study from a subtle
realist orientation (Hammersley, 2002). This is important because the research is not an attempt
to “reproduce” reality, but to “represent” it, recognizing that the goal of the researcher was to
represent the phenomena of homeschooling with a goal of getting as close to reality as possible
with the data collected from the participants (p. 74). Data collection was guided by the research
question: What role does the cooperative play in the operation of the families’ home schools?
Sample
Four home school families that were active in a home school organization that operated
in the southeastern U.S. agreed to participate in a two year study. The criteria for choosing the
families were that they (a) had at least three years of home school experience, (b) had children
they were currently home schooling, and (c) had at least one child who had completed the home
school education and had moved on to college or into the work force. These criteria were chosen
to insure a study cohort with extensive experience with home education that was willing to
candidly discuss their home schooling experience.
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
40
Table 1
Sample demographics
Smith Johnson Harbor Riley
Family
Structure
Intact Intact Intact Intact
Father’s
occupation
Constitutional
lawyer
Business
owner
University
employee (non
faculty)
Business
owner
Mother’s
education level
B.S. History Some college Some college B.S.
Education/
M.S. Education
administration
Children at
home school
Male (16),
Female (13),
Female (8),
Male (6)
Male (16),
Male (10)
Male (15),
Female (8)
Male (15)
Children at
college
Male (20)
Female (18)
Female (18) Male (18) None
Adult children
out of college
or in work
force
None None None Female (26)
Male (25)
Children ever
in private
school?
No Yes No Yes
Children ever
in public
school?
Yes Yes Yes Yes
The researcher used purposive homogeneity sampling from a home school group of
conservative religious families in order to find a sample that would provide a rich detailed
description of the research problem. This narrow sampling increases the depth of the findings of
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
41
the study but limits the transferability to other groups who differ from the sample. Table One
provides demographic data on the sample families. The original goal was to identify four
families in the local area who homeschooled their children. The first family contacted indicated
that they were a part of a homeschool group and thought that other families there might be
interested in participating in the study. At the time, the researcher did not know the nature of the
homeschool group (i.e. that it was actually a cooperative) or the significant role that the
cooperative would play in the operation of their homeschools.
The role and importance of these families’ religious and philosophical beliefs are
discussed in depth in earlier research (Anthony & Burroughs, 2009; Anthony & Burroughs,
2012; Anthony, 2013). In short, their beliefs influenced their goals for education. As one parent
explained, “Our responsibility is to raise godly children.” It is also important to understand their
view of society and how it influenced their decisions about education. At the top of society is
God as revealed through scripture; next is family, then the larger society (Anthony, 2013, p. 6).
Because of this, their educational decisions were based on what they felt was best for their
family as revealed in scripture. Their beliefs also influenced who is responsible for making key
educational decisions. The parents felt that they were the primary decision makers in their lives
of their children. Of course, this did not exclude the children from making decisions or
exercising freedom and agency in educational choices, as the parents felt they were preparing
their children for life and the ability to make their own choices.
Procedures
Data for this study were gathered through (a) interviews with the parents and children, (b)
informal discussions during and after periods of observations, (c) observation of the families at
home, (d) observations of home school group activities, (e) collection of artifacts (student work
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
42
samples and weekly logs), and (f) observation of the students at the cooperative. Interview
protocols were scripted using open-ended questions designed to elicit rich, comprehensive
dialogue from the participants. Observations were conducted in the homes of the homeschoolers
and at the home school cooperative site in an effort to “gather data about the ‘lived' experience of
participants” (Sherman & Webb, 1988, p. 125).
Data analysis began with an initial set of domains that emerged from the review of the
literature. As additional domains emerged during the data analysis, the set expanded accordingly.
QSR’s NVivo 8 software was used to code the data collected during the interviews and the
observations. Data charts and matrices were used to analyze the information gathered within and
across the four cases that was relevant to the research questions. Supporting data from both
parents and children as well as from the multiple data sources were identified to elicit major
findings of the study. Peer review and participant checks were utilized to confirm the
trustworthiness of the study’s findings and conclusions. The trustworthiness of the data was also
bolstered by the facts that the data were collected over a period two school years and multiple
data points within and across the cases were used to support each finding.
The original domains created to analyze data were motivations to home school, home
school operations, support systems, and curriculum choices. As data was collected through
observations and interviews, themes and patterns within the original four domains emerged. One
of the first patterns that emerged was the cooperative. It was situated within motivations,
operations, support systems, and curriculum choices. This was not expected. It soon became
evident that the cooperative was an integral part of their homeschools and critical to
understanding the families’ homeschool experiences. See Table 2 for sample themes that
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
43
emerged from the data and their relationship to the cooperative’s role in the families’
homeschools.
Table 2
Nodes and themes from data analysis
Original domains Emergent themes
Motivations to homeschool Social
Religious*
Family
Conflict with schools
Financial
Flexibility*
Cooperative*
Homeschool operations Teaching strategies*
Parent-student interaction*
Nature of the instruction environment*
Day to day activities*
Distractions
Household duties
Difficulties*
Frustrations
Support systems Outside resources
Cooperative*
Books
Other resources
Curriculum choices How decision are made
Concerns about homeschooling*
Challenges*
Nature of curriculum*
Autonomy Family*
Learner*
Societal*
Curriculum*
Influences on*
Tools of*
Results
Note: * indicates role of the cooperative or a connection to the cooperative that emerged during
analysis
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
44
Results
Cooperative
The families participated in a Christian-based classical education cooperative. The
cooperative has been operating in the area since 2001. Several families came together to help
teach and provide group academic and social activities to their children. Cooperative meetings
were held in a local church, but the cooperative was not affiliated with the church. A few
members of the cooperative were also members of the church, which was how they were able to
negotiate use of the facilities. The cooperative met in a building that once was used as a
children’s education facility. They also had access to the church gymnasium and a room adjacent
to the gymnasium that they used for a lunch room.
The curriculum was based on the classical trivium: grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Joseph
(2002) defined the constituent parts of the trivium: “Logic is the art of thinking; grammar, the
art of inventing symbols and combining them to express thought; and rhetoric, the art of
communicating thought one mind to another, the adaption of language to circumstance” (p. 3).
To help understand the nature of the curriculum, consider the following explanation of the
purpose of the trivium by Joseph:
The function of the trivium is the training of the mind for the study of matter and
spirit, which altogether constitute the sum of reality. The fruit of education is
culture, which Matthew Arnold defined as the knowledge of ourselves [mind] and
the world [matter]. In the sweetness and light of Christian culture, which add to
the knowledge of the world and ourselves the knowledge of God and of other
spirits, we are enabled truly to see life steadily and see it whole. (p. 8)
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
45
On their website, the cooperative declared that students no longer know how to think.
The goal of the cooperative was to help teach their members’ children how to think by using the
classical trivium. The cooperative met on Fridays. Monday through Thursdays, the children were
taught at home or in other arrangements made individually by the families. The high school
students also met on Tuesday afternoons, because there was not enough time to get all of their
tutorials in on Friday.
Fathers rotated as headmasters for a Friday, and as part of the cooperative agreement,
families agreed to teach two classes per year. The teachers included doctors for science, lawyers
for logic and rhetoric, engineers for science, pastors for theology and history, and an author and
editor for composition. There were also parents with experience teaching in public and private
schools and college. Not all parents had the professional background to teach a particular subject
or teaching experience. An example of this was the astronomy teacher who took astronomy in
high school and re-taught herself in order to teach astronomy at the cooperative.
The cooperative divided the course work along the classical trivium lines. Kindergarten
through sixth grade was the grammar stage. In the grammar stage, the courses available were
Latin, history, science, grammar, literature and composition, and art and music appreciation.
Junior high was the logic stage. They took the grammar stage classes available but at a more
advanced level and a logic class. High school was the rhetoric stage. They took the logic stage
classes at an advanced level and a rhetoric class and a choice of science courses. All students
could choose from four sciences: biology, chemistry, astronomy, and physics. Students had the
flexibility to pick and choose some courses or to not take a course. The core of the curriculum
was the history curriculum which had four strands that they rotated through each year. If a
student attended the cooperative for all twelve years, he or she would have received the full
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
46
curriculum three times. The four strands were Ancient history, Christendom, Early America, and
Modernity.
Parent-teachers posted their syllabi and assignments on the cooperative’s website. They
taught their tutorials on Friday, and the students worked on their assignments at home from
Monday through Thursday. The parent-teachers also administered and graded tests. Parents were
free to use the test grades in evaluating their individual student’s progress but were not required
to do so. Parent-teachers and students communicated by e-mail and also via postings on the web
site.
Families applied to participate in the cooperative. Included in the application was the
question: Can you give testimony of your conversion to Christ? This indicated the importance of
religion in the cooperative. Other questions addressed how the family planned to help improve
the cooperative and what the family expected to receive from the cooperative. The cost of
participation in the program was listed as $80-$100 per year. This included the costs of
classroom supplies, a science lab fee, and an art instruction fee. Required textbooks must be
obtained at additional costs.
The nature of the cooperative was important in several ways. The first way was that it
linked to the idea of home schooling becoming more like traditional schooling. Hill (2000)
predicted that “as home schooling families learn to rely on one another; many are likely to create
new institutions that look something like schools” (p. 21). This cooperative was one of these new
institutions. Families abandoned some of their aversion to traditional schooling and struck a
compromise, moving from home schooling independent of any outside agency to limited
cooperation with others who have similar educational goals. Unlike many public schools where
the family has to participate in all or nothing that the school offers, the families of the
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
47
cooperative formed a limited social contract and were free to pick and choose what they wanted
from the cooperative. The freedom to join the cooperative and participate at will is directly
linked to their view that family is the primary social organization within society to make
education decisions for children. They were willing to give up some of their agency to make
decisions to the cooperative because it respected their primacy in educational decisions. They
were also willing to give up some of their autonomy because their goal was not to eliminate all
structure in education, but rather to eliminate structures that they felt impeded their ability to
raise and educate their children as they saw fit.
The classical nature and purpose of the cooperative’s curriculum was qualitatively
different from what was available in other traditional education environments in the area. The
stated goal of the cooperative was to teach students to think and live as whole or complete
persons. They were less focused on teaching and training skills for a particular purpose or job.
They felt that a liberal and classical education would prepare students for anything they might
choose to do in life. There was also a decidedly Christian worldview in their curriculum. By
participating in the cooperative the home school families were provided a powerful tool to enable
them to exercise curricula autonomy and teach not only different subject matter but with
different methods than would be available in either public or private education in their home
towns.
Within-case analysis
Smith Family and the cooperative
The home school cooperative was the source of most of the curriculum that the Smiths
used in their home school. The cooperative supported their efforts in two ways: first, it provided
support to the parents’ teaching efforts, and second, it provided support to the learner by
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
48
providing opportunities not available at home. The first thing that the cooperative provided the
Smiths was a rich variety of curriculum choices that would be difficult to provide alone at home.
The cooperative provided the Smiths access to both elementary and secondary classes except for
mathematics. The Smiths took advantage of most of the courses. It also provided curriculum
expertise, which Jane highlighted when she said, “you can find other people to teach certain
things, so it is a tradeoff.” An example of this was the new government class at the cooperative
that was taught by a parent who graduated from college with a political science degree.
The second thing that the cooperative provided the Smiths was shared accountability. In
some ways, the Smiths gave up some of their autonomy to the cooperative and the other parent-
teachers, but in their view, this was a good thing. They had some trouble home schooling their
oldest son, Jonathan, until they joined the cooperative. Jack commented: “We struggled for
years. But it was different with a co-op. That schooling system was different. He was able to
get with peers and adults in the teaching environment.” The cooperative provided another
instructional environment that helped both Jonathan and his parents’ educational efforts. The
cooperative was difficult for Jonathan, but the more difficult environment and the opportunity to
be in class with other students at least one day a week played a positive supporting role. His
father continued, “He got low scores, but really was working harder. Now he knows how to
study and learns.” The cooperative also reduced some of the pressure on Jane to be the sole
educational authority figure:
It lets them have another authority over them that they may work harder for.
Whereas they may argue with me about doing something, if they have to do it and
turn it in on Friday, they just have to do it.
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
49
The third thing that the cooperative provided the parents was support for lesson
preparation. Jane did not have to prepare multiple lesson plans for her children because those
were provided by the teachers at the cooperative. She only had to prepare lessons for the classes
that she taught at the cooperative. She also had help with grading and assessment. The teachers at
the cooperative gave and graded tests that Jane could use to evaluate her children’s progress. She
also conducted assessment at home, but usually these were assessments provided by the teacher
at the cooperative. This assessment help also provided some independent evaluation of her
children’s progress.
The cooperative not only provided support to the parents but also to the students. The
primary benefit that it provided the students was the opportunity to be in a classroom
environment. Jane pointed out that the students had to prepare for the classes at the cooperative.
The classroom experience also helped their oldest son, Jonathan. Joseph commented that the
difficult classes at the cooperative were good because they prepared him for college: “College is
almost easier than that. It taught me how to study, especially in history class” and “there is a
really good writing program.” Joseph also indicated that the cooperative was good because it
gave him an opportunity to be in a class with other students. When asked what the best thing
about the cooperative was, he answered, “Cracking jokes in the classroom.” Though meant as a
joke, it shows the importance of social interactions with both a teacher other than his mother and
other students. Both children indicated that they enjoyed their time at the cooperative.
The cooperative was the most important resource that the Smiths had because it helped to
overcome some of the handicaps that are systemic in home schooling including, the parents’
inability to teach all subjects and the students’ lack of classroom experience. It also provided the
children with an opportunity to socialize with children and adults outside of their immediate
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
50
family, a constant criticism of home schooling (Kantrowitz & Wingert, 1998). The cooperative
required the family to give up some of their curricular autonomy, but what they received in
return was very important to the Smiths’ ability to conduct their home school.
Johnson Family and the cooperative
The cooperative was an important resource for the Johnson family because it was the
source of most of their curriculum. In response to a question about the importance of the
cooperative, Cynthia said,
Um, wow. In every way, I’d say because it’s not one person doing all the work
and then everyone just following like sheep. What we have is a bunch of strong
willed, opinionated home schoolers. Hopefully, we have found each person’s
strength and interest. So that they can pour out their knowledge and love of a
subject into my children and there’s no way with four kids, used to be six, I could
love and be as interested and well-informed in every subject for every single
grade level.
Her comment showed how important the cooperative was to the operation of their home school.
It allowed the Johnsons to provide a wide range of curriculum choices with minimal input.
Cynthia and Chris did not have to prepare all of the lesson plans for the classes for the four
children they were teaching. They only had to prepare for the classes that they taught at the
cooperative. Their children were taught by a medical doctor in science, an editor and author in
composition, a certified English teacher in literature, and a lawyer in rhetoric. Calvin said,
“That’s mainly what the coop is for. It’s just enlarging upon the material we’ve already done.”
Cynthia described how the cooperative changed the operation of their home school when she
said, “We did not have the coop for the first two years. Just figuring it out was hard. I had to
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
51
figure out how to teach four children all the subjects each day.” Then they joined the cooperative
because, “we wanted to teach logic and I didn’t want to learn it and then teach it so we found a
friend who studied logic in college and started it for us.”
The cooperative also provided socialization opportunities for the children. Chris stated in
response to a question about socialization, “And I am sure Cynthia’s touched on before, they are
involved in a large community. First, the coop, and then also with the larger home school
community, and we do activities with the other families.” Cynthia added, “There are over a
hundred families in our home school group.” When discussing some of the negatives of home
schooling the older children indicated that not being around other people as much was one of
them. They also said that the cooperative helped overcome this problem because they could see
their friends at the cooperative.
Another purpose that the cooperative played was accountability. Calvin said, “I have
some accountability with the coop, but I really am a procrastinator, and I’m sure that if I didn’t
have the coop, I’d get a whole lot less done.” He said that he got further behind with his studies
before the family joined the cooperative. Besides keeping the children accountable to someone
other than their parents, it also helped the parents evaluate their children. When asked how he got
graded, he said, “That’s what our coop is for. Usually we turn in the tests to the teacher there (the
cooperative) and they do the grading.” Cynthia backed this up with, “In most of their classes they
have tests and so you can tell if they get it or not, because they’ll do well on the test if they get it
and they’re flunking if they don’t. And that’s with most of our advanced cooperative work.”
The cooperative also provided classroom experiences to the children. The teachers at the
cooperative ran their classes like traditional classroom teachers. Caitlin’s Bible class teacher had
a syllabus and class rules. The rules were very similar to those found in traditional classrooms.
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
52
The teachers provided the students with their daily assignments, tests, and weekly instruction in a
class room. The cooperative allowed the Johnsons to balance the independence of their home
school experience with the classroom experience they would need if they went to college.
The cooperative provided unique out of classroom learning opportunities. When they
were studying the medieval period, the families in the cooperative put on a medieval fair.
Caitlin’s literature teacher also invited all of her students over for an overnight party so they
could watch the movie version of Ivanhoe. Some members of the cooperative also got together
and attended a Creation Science seminar at a local church and tied their science instruction at the
cooperative into it.
Harbor family and the cooperative
The most important resource that the Harbors had was the cooperative. Rachel
explained that “I don’t have to go and prepare a whole curriculum, a whole lesson plan for
astronomy and one for composition and all that.” The cooperative helped expand the curriculum
options for the Harbors and at the same time reduced their workload. The cooperative provided a
balance between the traditional setting provided in a public school and the strictly home school
setting that Rachel started she when began homeschooling. It also provided courses that she did
not have the expertise to teach, including Latin and astronomy. The cooperative addressed one
significant concern that Rachel had about home schooling and that was activities that Randy and
Ray missed including sports. The cooperative offered both fencing and cross country to the
students. The final thing that the cooperative provided was accountability. Rachel was always
concerned about whether she was teaching enough, and she was worried that she was not
teaching the right material. The combined efforts of the cooperative helped her to feel that she
was providing her children with a quality education.
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
53
Riley family and the cooperative
Like the other families in the study, the most important resource was the cooperative. The
cooperative provided the majority of Matt’s course work, freeing Mary from the burden of
preparing multiple syllabi and weekly lesson plans. It also added flexibility to the courses that
the Riley family was able to study. The most important thing that the cooperative provided was
the classical education that Mary could not find in a private or public school setting. When asked
how the cooperative supported her educational efforts, Mary responded,
It is incredible. We have a physician teaching our kids biology, chemistry, and
physics. Subjects that I’m not equipped to. Our kids learn Latin. An editor and
author teaches literature. Chris Johnson teaching too. All the talents together. We
are all raising our children different and go to different churches, but are all on the
same page for what we want in classical education, in the Christian way.
Not only did the cooperative provide classes taught by other parents that Mary would not be able
to provide, but it also provided social and moral support. She said, “We have the best of both
worlds. On Friday they have interaction with other students: It’s a good group of kids. Moms
are being supported by each other’s prayers. Everyone cares for each other’s family and
children.” The children got social time with other children, and the mothers supported each other
through prayer. The cooperative served as a learning community. It helped bridge the gap
between totally independent home schooling and traditional schooling. The cooperative helped
Mary reach her goal of curriculum freedom for her children.
Cross Case Analysis
Each of the families identified the cooperative as their most important resource. The
families indicated that the cooperative freed them from preparing and teaching lessons for every
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
54
subject and enabled them to avoid teaching subjects that they did not have the ability or desire to
teach. The subject families’ efforts with the cooperative extend findings by others about home
school families forming support groups to help with instructional challenges (Griffith, 1998;
Klicka, 2002; Martin, 1997).
The cooperative provided the families with social activities, field trips and athletic
activities including fencing and cross country. Sports were particularly important to the Harbors.
The cooperative helped the families overcome the social isolation that can result from home
schooling. It also allowed the families to socialize their children with same age peers who shared
similar belief systems. Rather than viewing this as a negative, the families felt it was their
responsibilities to safeguard their children from negative socialization that might happen in a
traditional school.
A significant addition to the literature was the idea that the cooperative in many ways
was the reason that at least two of the families continued to home school their children. The
Johnsons and Rileys indicated that the classical nature of the home school was what drew them
to home school, because it helped them achieve their goal of providing a classical education to
their children. They both indicated that they would consider sending their children to a private
school that had a classical curriculum. The cooperative allowed these families to provide their
children with an education not available in local public or private schools. The cooperative was a
significant motivator and resource for these families.
The families acknowledged that participation in the cooperative was not all positive.
They each pointed out that there was a loss of autonomy when they joined the cooperative. This
was mostly a concern to the Harbors. The Johnsons and Rileys were instrumental in beginning
the cooperative and had initial input in the curriculum, so they were less concerned about a loss
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
55
of autonomy. This initial input and influence did not mean that the Johnsons and Rileys were
happy with everything at the cooperative. Neither of them liked the writing course and
unsuccessfully worked to have it changed. Jane Smith also did not like the writing course. There
were disagreements over the way the theology course was taught. Because of this, the Harbors,
Smiths, and Rileys did not participate in the theology class the second year of the study.
There were some things that the families could not receive at the cooperative. Two
significant things were mathematics and modern foreign language courses. The families used
some form of commercially produced program for mathematics. The Rileys and Johnsons also
used a for-profit educational corporation to provide advanced math instruction. In the Johnson
and Harbor home schools, the father also assisted with mathematics instruction. The cooperative
did teach Latin, but the Harbors wanted their children to study a modern foreign language.
Rachel used a computer based language program to teach Chinese.
The loss of autonomy was voluntary, and the families did not have to participate in all
activities or courses that the cooperative provided. The Smiths did not attend a Creation Science
seminar, and each family missed cooperative social and academic activities. Though there was
the loss of autonomy, each of the families indicated that the benefit of participating in the
cooperative outweighed the costs. Some of the costs included an hour drive for the Smiths and a
30 minute drive for the Harbors.
The key role that the cooperative played in each of the families’ home school is an
important finding. These families created an institution that looked something like a school and
engaged in a community of practice that as Safran (2010) explained amounted to “a joint
enterprise of home education children” (p. 111). They had a governing body, a set curriculum,
teachers, and syllabi. They even had extracurricular activities. The cooperative gave them what
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
56
they would describe as the best of traditional schooling and home schooling. They participated in
classroom instruction on Fridays from other parent-teachers, which provided them with outside
accountability and classroom experience, but they had the freedom to study at home at their own
pace from Monday to Thursday. The cooperative provided just enough structure to help the
students prepare for a future that might include college classrooms. It also addressed social
needs.
A significant addition to the literature is the irony of the cooperative. These families
rejected the outside authority of traditional schools when they decided to home school, but in
their practice they not only joined a cooperative but relied on it for 90% of their curriculum and
instruction. In many ways, they traded one authority for another. One explanation is that these
families have direct input into the nature of the curriculum of the cooperative, and it is more
responsive to their concerns than traditional schools. Additionally, these families were not
looking to exercise complete autonomy and independence in education. They wanted to provide
a certain type of education to their children. They felt that traditional schools were too rigid as
well as provided limits on the fundamental role of parents in their children’s education. The
cooperative was acceptable because it respected their beliefs about the primacy of the family in
educational decisions (Anthony, 2013). Within the cooperative they were able to act on what
they believed was their scripture mandated role in raising their children without the outside
influence of schools.
Finally the cooperative was in essence “a joint enterprise” (Safran, 2010, p. 111) that
truly required participation from all families in order to effectively operate. Unlike traditional
schools in which parents are often relegated to a peripheral role and not seen as vital to the
operation of the school and the process of education, the cooperative magnified the role of the
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
57
parents in education. In the cooperative, parents exercised curricular choice and participated in
the core function of education- teaching.
Discussion
The results of this study provide a detailed description of what the “shape and purpose”
(Safran, 2009, p. 26) of an educational cooperative look like, including the types of goals and
timelines provided, and the size of the commitment required. It also extends those findings. Not
only did cooperatives give shape and purpose, but the families’ home school operations were
dependent upon the cooperative. It enabled them to provide the classical education that they
wanted for their children. It also relieved the burden of preparing and teaching lessons in every
subject. The cooperative helped address some of the concerns and challenges that home
schooling poses for families, including social isolation, the ability to teach difficult subjects, and
accountability. The cooperative also signified a compromise for the families between the almost
total freedom of home schooling and the accountability and support provided by a traditional
school. It gave the families what they felt was the best of both worlds.
The idea of the cooperative as a compromise between the rigidity of traditional schooling
and the freedom of unschooling is important to understand. Families choose to homeschool for a
multitude of reasons, and these reasons by default will impact the curriculum choices these
families make and the nature of their homeschools. When these families made their transition
from traditional schooling to homeschooling, they were not looking for complete autonomy for
themselves or the children, but more freedom than was afforded them by the rigidity of the
traditional schools available to them in their communities (Anthony & Burroughs, 2010). This is
important because homeschooling as an educational treatment can afford families and children
varying degrees of autonomy. These families’ concept of the role of parents in the education of
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
58
their children (Anthony, 2013) influenced the way they operated their homeschool and the
amount of freedom afforded the children in decisions. Ultimately, they believed that parents had
a God given responsibility to shape the education of their children.
Understanding the role of the cooperative is important because as Hill (2000) predicted,
these families had become part of an organization that looked something like a school. The
cooperative was instrumental to the parents’ ability to provide a classical education. It also
helped address some of the problems associated with home schooling. This study is important
because it illustrates that families addressed the challenges they identified associated with
homeschooling and adapted their educational practices through organizing educational
cooperatives. Though these families wanted to break from the rigidity and control of traditional
schools, they were willing to voluntarily give up some autonomy because they were giving up
that autonomy to an organization that they were an equal partner in and that respected the role of
the family in education. Finally, critically important is that in the cooperative, the families were
full partners in developing curriculum and teaching their children. They had come together to
accomplish core education tasks that are normally conducted in a school setting.
When discussing freedoms afforded the families within these homeschools, it is
important to note that the parents exercised a significant amount of the freedom relative to the
students when it came to making curricular decisions. Within this parental control, the children
in the families were able to make decisions about what to study including course selections at the
cooperative. Outside the cooperative they had the option to follow their own interests by
studying topics not identified by the cooperative or their parents as a part of the curriculum. The
curriculum was fluid, and both parents and children were involved in making curriculum
decisions. This freedom even extended to allowing children to decide whether the students
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
59
attended a public school, private school or remained homeschooled in the case of the Riley
family. The nature of curriculum decisions was analyzed and reported in earlier research
(Anthony, 2012) and not a significant part of this study in that the goal of this study was to focus
on the role of the cooperative. Finally, though the freedom exercised within these homeschools
might be somewhat less than exercised in other homeschools, the nature of freedom exercised by
both parents and students was significantly more than would have been found in any other
educational setting in the area. In the context of their communities, these families would be
educational radicals.
Conclusion and Implications
The home school movement is not a monolithic movement. There is much variance in the
way that home school families conduct school. This is important to understand for two reasons.
First, it is difficult for those in traditional education to draw important conclusions about how to
teach based on any perceived success home school families have had, but with that in mind, the
second point becomes more salient. Because home school families conduct school in such
diverse ways, they provide potential models to those within traditional education that are looking
for new ways to organize and operate schools. The freedom that home school families have in
operating their schools allows them to tailor their home schools to the needs of their children.
They have broken out of the mold of place based schooling and have focused their efforts on
identifying what needs to be taught (or learned) and how to teach it. This is one of the reasons
they have organized cooperatives and other formal and informal groups to help meet their
specific educational goals. The children do not exist for the cooperative, the cooperative exists
for the children.
Educational cooperatives and the changing nature of home education: finding balance between
autonomy, support, and accountability
60
The ability of the families to assume the core functions of education in a voluntary
organization has implications for traditional schools. These families are just four of many who
have assumed greater responsibility over their children’s education. Traditional schools can learn
from these families’ success and ability in assuming these core functions and begin to see parents
as equal partners in education. Traditional schools have much to gain from leveraging the
resources, concern, and energy that parents can bring to process of education. Too long have
schools assumed that they are the sole experts in education. These families’ experiences and
others like them who homeschool are an indication that schools can rebalance the amount of
control over a child’s education. Of course, this means giving up some control to the family
when it comes to key decisions about education which will necessitate a much more
individualized education for all students.
The families in this study provide one example of how education can be tailored to focus
on the learning needs of the students using a hybrid form of schooling in which students receive
some direct instruction from teachers combined with a significant amount of individual based
learning. This individual based learning includes both choice in the courses taken and choice of
topics to study within the courses taken. The traditional model of education described by Dewey
(1944) and Greene (2007) was based on an industrial society when families had limited access to
educational resources. We live in a time of unprecedented access to information. The Sloan
Consortium (Picciano & Seaman, 2009) reported that in the 2007- 2008 school year, 75% of
public schools had students enrolled in either a blended or fully online course. With the freedom
of access to information and the growth of online learning comes the opportunity to divorce
education from the place based mindset of the modern industrial educational establishment.
Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning 2015 Vol. 9 Issue 18
61
This study and others on home schooling indicate that parents can assume a greater role
in the education of their children. This is relevant to traditional schools because improving
educational outcomes is dependent on increased parental involvement directly in education at
home. The growth of the home school movement has indicated that there is a small minority of
parents who are willing to take total control of their children’s education. Traditional schools do
not need to fear this, but see it as a reset of the power and responsibility balance between the
school and home over education.
Perhaps Holt and Farenga (2003) were right in their assessment that our schools are
handicapped by the very environment of the school and our institutional intransience against
moving from an industrial model of education to a model of education that takes advantage of
changes in society and technology to create a new model of education. If traditional school
personnel are interested in creating a new model, the home school movement is rich with many
examples of how learning can occur outside of the school with increased parental involvement,
but maintaining the structural advantages of schooling. The model of the home school
cooperative described in this study is one such example.
Kenneth V. Anthony is an assistant professor in the Department of Curriculum, Instruction,
and Special Education at Mississippi State University where he teaches social studies methods
courses in the elementary education program. His current research agenda includes preservice
teachers’ knowledge and ability to teach social studies disciplines, using primary sources in the
classroom, and homeschooling. He is particularly interested in what “traditional schools” can
learn from homeschools in order to make schools more democratic and student centered.